Pastor Nadarkhani was arrested in October 2009 while attempting to register his church. He was tried and found guilty of apostasy (abandoning Islam) in September 2010. He has been sentenced to death.

We were evidently even unwise to believe the written judgements of Iran's Supreme Court, which stated:

He has frequently denied the prophethood of the great prophet of Islam and the rule of the sacred religion of Islam. And he has proven his apostasy by organizing evangelistic meetings and inviting others to Christianity, establishing a house church, baptizing people, expressing his faith to others and, denying Islamic values.

For the real reason Pastor Nadarkhani is to hanged is that he is a rapist, an extortioner and (horror of horrors) a Zionist.

You see, the Western media (and, presumably, Iran's Supreme Court) 'twisted the real story'. The impending death penalty is nothing to do with denying Allah, defaming Mohammed or disrespected the Qur'an: it was dispensed for 'security-related crimes'.

Gholomali Rezvani, the deputy governor of Gilan province, where Pastor Nadarkhani was tried and convicted, says: "No one is executed in Iran for their choice of religion." Then Rezvani explained: "He is a Zionist and has committed security-related crimes."

It is quite incredible, as the world looks on, that Iran would attempt this sort of outrage. The British Government has unequivocally denounced Iran, as has Lambeth Palace and the White House. There is, as yet, still nothing from the Holy See. It is not known if the Pope's silence is due to bureaucratic incompetence or the need for covert diplomacy. If ever it was the latter, there is clearly now an urgent need to speak out loud and very clearly. Pastor Nadarkhani has done nothing more than maintain his devout faith, which is a universal right for people. The Iranian authorities are manifestly attempting to force him to renounce that faith, which violates the religious values they claim to defend, crosses all bounds of decency and breaches Iran's own international obligations.

But they are clearly feeling the pressure, as their embassies around the world are besieged with Nadarkhani supporters, phoning and emailing their excellencies to express unified outrage. So now the allegations are of rape, extortion and Zionist sympathies. And so he will be hanged, and justice will be served, for there is nothing worse in the world than a Zionist raper and extorter of money. And if that doesn't quite work, wait for allegations of homosexual paedophilia to be appended. That charge was also unfortunately omitted from the original Supreme Court transcript. Must have been a translation error.

90 Comments:

"The Iranian authorities are manifestly attempting to force him to renounce that faith, which violates the religious values they claim to defend, crosses all bounds of decency and breaches Iran's own international obligations."

May I ?

"The Israeli authorities are manifestly attempting to force him to renounce that faith, which violates the religious values they claim to defend, crosses all bounds of decency and breaches Israel's own international obligations."

Could you imagine the uproar and demands from the UN, EU, African and Arab nations etc that this be stopped immediately, under threats of goodness knows what if it was Israel enacting such behaviour against someone converting to Islam?

They give this scumbag of a nation a legitimacy that it does not deserve and a platform to spout bile and hatred at others whereas their obvious failings should be condemned unequivocally!

Ernst despairs at the cowardice and hypocrisy of the nations of the world.

You have done a very good job in publicizing the plight of Youcef Nadarkhani but why do you go on to cast aspersions on the Vatican? The public silence of the Holy See does not mean it is doing nothing. Vatican diplomacy has achieved more than most people realise over the years, even with Iran. Was it not Vatican diplomacy that led to the release of the British sailors taken captive in 2007? I am in complete agreement with you in thinking the attack on Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani a travesty of justice. We must all do whatever we can to prevent the death sentence being carried out.

Blofeld, if the Israelis were doing this, then of course the US and EU would be shouting at the top of their lungs: Israel has been living on economic life-support from the US since its foundation, and continues to do so to this day, despite its grandiose claims to 'making the desert bloom' (in fact, the Arabs were doing that long before the state of Israel was created). Israel HAS to pay attention to the west, despite its racially motivated sense of superiority; the Iranians don't, and so cover diplomacy may be more effective here.

Oswin, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by your comment. If you're saying that it's natural (considering some of their opponents in the region) that the Israelis should have a sense of superiority, I might agree with you to an extent. Certainly, some of the nut jobs that Isreal faces make it hard for one not to feel superior, despite the fact that Israel itself is directly responsible for the creation of many of these whackos.

However, by 'racially motivated sense of superiority' I'm referring to Isreal's belief in its own superiority over EVERYONE, including Christians, western Liberals, the Americans, the British...EVERYONE, not just those who have lowered themselves to the level of murderers - EVERYONE. If it doesn't act the way Iran acts, it's only because it relies western support, not for any reason of inherent democratic values.

"Changing religion is not a capital offence in all civilised societies. Iran(Persia) spares no opportunity to tell the rest of the world how muchculture and civilisation you have. Well, it is situations like this thatshow that assertion to be a complete fabrication. You have not progressed atall in the thousands of years that you have been around. But, of course you could prove me wrong by releasing this man from your gripand show some tolerance and humanity, for once."

Their response :

"Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in London renounces the publishednews regarding the death penalty for Mr. Yousof Nadarkhani and announcesthat the Court of Appeal in the Islamic Republic of Iran has not issued anyverdict on his case. Accordingly, the allegations to the issue of the deathpenalty for the above mentioned, are unsubstantiated."

The last sentence says it all, from what you have now reported. As with all muslims, they lie just as they draw breath. The frightening thing is I doubt they even know they are doing it.

Blofeld, (Err, Mr Blofeld to you, young person!)if the Israelis were doing this, then of course the US and EU would be shouting at the top of their lungs (Em, we ALL would most definitely, however the chance of this stated happening in Israel is about a chance of 1:4 billion, bit like in this country): Israel has been living on economic life-support from the US since its foundation (has palestinians/PLO not received likewise from America and EU or do you think those nice kind arab cousins are pumping money in?), and continues to do so to this day, despite its grandiose claims to 'making the desert bloom' (in fact, the Arabs were doing that long before the state of Israel was created) (*giggle*, despite historical evidence, yes?). Israel HAS to pay attention to the west, despite its racially motivated sense of superiority (Completely unfounded and the existence of Israel is based on security needs, not racially motivated superiority); the Iranians (Ahh, Religiously superior, yes?) don't, and so cover diplomacy may be more effective here.

"despite the fact that Israel itself is directly responsible for the creation of many of these whackos." In this case, a whacko is a whacko because he/she IS a whacko, caused by their whacko belief that they really are genuine Palestinians and not trans-jordanians and their whacko religion, Imams and terrorist leaders say so. simples)

"However, by 'racially motivated sense of superiority' I'm referring to Isreal's belief in its own superiority over EVERYONE, including Christians, western Liberals, the Americans, the British...EVERYONE, not just those who have lowered themselves to the level of murderers - EVERYONE. (Outrageous slur, with no basis in fact. Pathetic commenting, young man!) If it doesn't act the way Iran acts, it's only because it relies western support, not for any reason of inherent democratic values." The West continues to sell off bits of Israel by pressuring them towards a peace that is illogical (nothing is ever given back to Israel as a counter goodwill gesture, even that they have a right to exist) and dangerous (They will be driven from the land once the safeguards are removed and they are vulnerable) and to which the obvious confrontation will be inevitable.

HELLO Numpty, newly created by the looks of your profile. Welcome to the real world and don't believe all the crap that is presented to you by arabs and liberal luvvies.

Ernst S Blofeld

PsJohn in Cheshire 1 October 2011 16:48

"The last sentence says it all, from what you have now reported. As with all muslims, they lie just as they draw breath. The frightening thing is I doubt they even know they are doing it."

Firstly, Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.

Kitman - Lying by omission.

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit. If Allah is deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses and others are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose.

Bukhari (49:857) - "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar." Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.

Dear boy, they do know they are doing it and are commanded and commended by allah and mohammed for doing so!

""Cranmer tends to think the worst of Rome (the clue is in his name)."(The Spectator)"

Good Lord, bird. Have you been at the sacramental wine and not diluted it with water?

There is a procedure detailed below unfortunately;

"To many people, putting a bird in a separate cage from their other birds for a couple of days is what they consider adequate quarantine procedure. Many times this cage is not only in the same room as the other birds, but is placed next to another bird's cage. For a true quarantine situation, the bird should really be housed in a separate building away from your other birds. "

It appears you are determined, by sheer provocation, to be be evicted from having your nest perching in His Grace's branches and that 'Protecting Your Birds Through Quarantine' is the only answer!

If there is one situation that makes a muslim sit up and take notice, it’s force of arms. After what happened to the Ark Royal this year and navy this week, one wonders if Cameron appreciates this. The UK's net contribution to the EU, between £ 30 to 40 million a DAY. We could have done with that ship and crew out there, and the EU can go to hell. Only the strong survive in the end...

Regarding lies. Refresh my memory.Who was branded a liar & the Father of lies? & who was it that gave him that title?.Does the Iranian court REALLY expect us to believe this rubbish? It's abominable that this situation should exist. To insult the Free World's intelligence like this shows their bizzare fear of Jesus Christ & His message.Show some mercy & maturity! Release this innocent man. If he scares you send him here, we need men of his calibre.

Distressing as current events are, we must not forget that Iran has a nuclear program. If these muslim clerics can abuse and humiliate a peaceful man and his family, they’ll have no qualms in throwing hydrogen bombs at infidel countries.

Small muslim countries don’t prove to be a threat to world peace. Invade Iran and break the place up into tribal homelands. They’ll spend the rest of eternity at each others throats on differences in Islam, and leave the rest of us alone. Archbishop, looks like we’ll be sharing the next Nobel peace prize. What a jolly good show that would be !

The Holy See does not have bad relations with Iran. Not great ones. But not bad ones, either. In fact, Iran has had an arrangement in place for several years whereby the Vatican would mediate in any dispute with the United States should that matter ever really come to a head.

Why risk that, which has the potential to save far more lives if it ever needed to be put into operation, and why risk the safety of Catholics on the ground (who, again, do not have it easy, but do not have it too hard, either), to save the life of one man who comes out of the rather clod-hopping American-backed circles that do in fact make the lives of the ancient indigenous Christians in the Middle East very difficult indeed, and who probably believes the Papacy to be the Antichrist?

As, in fact, it must be. Unless all of its claims about itself are true in full. So, which is it? Are the Papal Claims true in full? Or is the Papacy the Antichrist? It must be one or the other.

"Lindsay. If the Inspector reads you correctly, you’re having a go at the Papacy."

Goodness, is everybody on the wine tonight except Ernst?

OIG, Ernst thinks you'll find the young man in his first confession outfit is RC (clod-hopping American-backed circles and that he has been organizing evangelistic meetings and inviting others to Christianity, establishing a house church, baptizing people, expressing his faith to others ?, a clue perhaps?), hence his statement is 'if you are not one of us or disagree with Rome, then die evangelical, die. We will not fight for you. uggh! What a charmer and not someone Ernst would be happy to be associated with in church!

As you state..This thread is about an unfortunate Christian (and a fellow human being, who has broken no law) in Iran. Rather small minded of you doing that right now, is it not... Well said that man! Three loud "huzzahs". Ernst's way of building morale and intimidating the enemy.

Re Pastor Nedarkhani.... I e-mailed my local MP a certain John Penrose and asked whether he had read or had been informed about HG's post and The Times coverage and was he going to raise this at all but have to date received a deafening silence. Why am I not surprised?

I would have appreciated a little missive along the lines of:

Sorry mate but we politicians don't get mixed up in anything political. We have to keep our eye on the ball of the dear old EU. If we keep our noses clean and when the wear and tear of serving this country is too much or the useless electorate kick us out we have already done our networking in Brussels and Strasbourg ready for the next challenge....OrI am replying on behalf of Mr Penrose. We take your comments about poor Pastor Nedarkhani very seriously indeed. Please note that when at the Bow Group he commissioned and published papers on subjects as diverse as preserving human rights, recruiting more female Conservative MPs and reforming the House of Lords.OrThank you for referring your concerns to us but the BBC has not mentioned his plight so we are unable to...

Tiddles is a much loved member of the Blofeld family and irreplaceable, despite her continual scratching of a certain part of the hallway wallpaper, that has become Ernst's very own 'Forth Bridge'.

It's an old lady thing, old boy, that appears to replicate their maternal need to care for their offspring, long after departing the family home or they are just old spinsters, in dire need of company or Ernst's psychological profiling of the issue is Cats don't beg, they demand. Here is the brutal truth, all woman crave an "alpha" (which is why they love romance novels so much). But with cats it's even better: There is no guessing--you know what they want, when they want it, and how they want it. The wisdom of Ernst Lecter, if you like. Pithy comment but without the slaughter!

Ernst send his regards to the old gals.

Ernsty, your Inspectorship General.

ps

From his most recent comment, Ernst might have to invite Mr Lindsay over for a profiling assessment and a light snack.

***Memo to Ernst***

Remember to buy fava beans and a nice chianti, Lindsay will bring the main course. *slurp slurp*

David Lindsay raises an interesting point in a divisive and insensitive way given the circumstances.

How should Christian groups evangalise in volatile situations such as Iran? What attention should be paid to the predictable reaction of regimes threatened politically by the growth of Christianity? What regard should be paid to the safety of established Christian Churches in the region who have endured persecution for decades? Christ warned His disciples to exercise wisdom whilst remain pure. How do we understand this?

Delicate questions but not for now. Like others I pray for this brave soul who must be going through hell right now and for his family.

I trust the Vatican is working quietly behind the scenes and facilitating the release of this man. Avoiding a loss of face will be important for the Iranian authorities and discreet diplomacy will probably be more effective than grandstanding.

PsErnesty and PreacherThe quote above was taken directly from the Spectator that our host cited in his post! So it really wasnae me!

The True Gospel of Jesus Christ is an offence to many, for those in 'organised religion' and those outside it.The True Gospel lays the axe at the root of all religions initiated by the Father of Lies and he will do all he can to prevent the spread of the Gospel..Satan plans do not change, whatever he cannot kill, he will corrupt and distort.All false religion(of whatever variety or creed )originated in Babylon where Satan`s plan to overthrow the God of the Bible was initiated through fallen men driven by greed, lust, and the desire for power.

All those who preach the True Gospel of Jesus Christ are enemies of this World.Jesus warned us that we would face death and persecution by the World because the World hates us.The World hates us because the World hates the Light because it reveals what lies within the darkness.

David Lindsay is a nut; his small minded post proves it. He gives a damn about Middle-East Christians unless there is a connection to Zionists, American imperialists and Evangelical troublemakers. And you Dodo unless you have something good to say, just STFU.

"David Lindsay raises an interesting point in a divisive and insensitive way given the circumstances." He did no such thing and only a crazed, one subject obsessive could deem it one.

"The quote above was taken directly from the Spectator that our host cited in his post! So it really wasnae me!" But completely taken out of context, now boringly done EACH time by you.!

"But he is absolutely right to say that the churches really should be united, clear and loud in response to this outrage, and they should speak out now. " is how the article finished and what others here believe to be correct or has the milk of Rome's christian kindness to others curdled?

It appears obvious to Ernst that Quarantine bodes on the horizon if you continue in your provocative behaviour.

It's a pretty poor situation if one can't ask serious questions about approaches to evangalising in countries like Iran where one not only puts ones own life at risk but others too. I stress I was in no way supporting the rest of Mr Lindsay's post. I appreciate this may not be the time for this.

And how on earth have I implied that Rome is anything less than truely concerned about the plight of this man and other Christians in the region? Rome has a diplomatic relationship with Iran and in 2010 exchanged letters over freedom of religious expression. The Vatican's letter remains private but the Iranian one is available if people trouble to search for it.

The 'True faith' being evangelicals? The rest of us poor souls in "organised religion", really the agents of satan, should make no effort. I take it this includes the established Christian Churches in Iran, the Anglican Communion as well as the Roman Church?

Honestly, your post is as offensive as Mr Lindsay's.

I'm surprised others are not rebuking you - unless, of course, they agree with you.

The Inspector thanks you for your support Dodo. He is sure that many of us have had Len up to their necks (...or crop in your case...).

Len has managed to parasite the Archbishop’s site to propagate his offensive take on the Word. You would think he would have his own blog site which we could conveniently ignore.

Had Len been around during Christ's time on earth, the Inspector is sure he would have found fault with the Son of God. It’s in his complaining, whining nature. The Scriptures would have had The parable of Len the irritant...

Ernst old chap. A special thanks from the Inspector General for brightening up this site with your wit and wisdom, always eagerly consumed when you publish. And what a formidable bunch of foes you have to counter: The aforementioned Len, Tingey and Atlas Wept, to mention but a mere dreary three...

Your insight into womanhood is spot on, ringing many bells. Your beloved Tiddles is of course safe. But should you detect the odour of lavender and cat’s piss, make a run for it...

Happy New Year (alas, the Jewish kind) everyone. May it bring you all health, wealth and happiness.

And now, back into the fray. Thank you Mr Ernst, for yet again correcting another muddle-ahead, this one being Corrigan1. If I may add to your counter-strike...

Mr Corrigan1 opined: "Israel has been living on economic life-support from the US since its foundation, and continues to do so to this day..." Evidently, Mr Corrigan1 is clueless about history ande makes up facts from the slogans read to him from the Guardian by his mommy.

Fact: Israel was under an arms embargo by the US upon its creation in 1948, while the Arabs were receiving nearly unlimited quantities of arms from the USSR. It wasn't until 1968, when the US, worried about Soviet influence, agreed to sell fighter jets to Israel.

Fact: Israel is not on "life support" by the US. Israel receives loan guarantees, which it has been paying for and international aid in exchange for substantial technology transfers, agreements not to compete with the US in certain sectors of the arms market and a crucial strategic alliance involving intelligence and guaanteed access to military bases and equipment should such be needed.

He says, "...despite its grandiose claims to 'making the desert bloom' (in fact, the Arabs were doing that long before the state of Israel was created)." This is another fiction Corrigan1 has pulled out his hat. A Google satellite view of the region will quickly settle this worthless claim.

And, "Israel HAS to pay attention to the west, despite its racially motivated sense of superiority..." Gosh, how does one naysay such accusations? If this, if that, and juvenile projections by a paranoid personality. How about Mr Corrigan1 has to keep his hands off his sister, despite his perversion-motivated incest drives, or else his dad will beat the living daylights out of him. Homework assignment to the young Master Corrigan1: Prove otherwise.

If history is no longer on the curriculum, don't they at least teach plain old logic to the young wastrels anymore, Mr Ernst?

I'm not as hostile personally towards len as you - honestly! I just see him caught in the mesh of fundamental evangelicalism. It's his obsessive preoccupation against the Apostolic Church I find so irritating. His reliance on manufactured and discredited history and the looney 'pastors' he cites, just gets my feathers all ruffled.

I find Shacklefree is a knowledgable counter to the peculiar spin put by some on book of Revelation and find his comments increasingly illuminating.

It's good to be open and talk our differences and how Christians have arrived at such opposed understandings.

Dodo. Your a good natured bird to put up with Len, but I am aware you seek (...and address...) all opinions. The Inspector is not actually hostile to the being of Len, just what he stands for, viz “I am the most righteous and deserving of all the souls on this site”. Enough to try the patience of the saints, the Inspector is sure you’ll agree.

To save him from his smugness, the Inspector suggests Len might receive a visit from the Holy Spirit during the middle of the night, to put him on the correct road. Of course the Holy Spirit would have better things to do, so the Inspector recommends He also frightens Len s__tless whiles He’s at it. A sort of “don’t have Me down here again” divine warning...

I pray the Holy Spirit may be gentler towards Mr len for fear he mistakes Him for satan appearing as an angel of light. In my opinion, the man has no malice but is just confused.

Len's self declared 'mission' is to rescue 'religious christians' caught by the "Great Delusion". He thinks Roman Catholics are especially ripe for evangelising. Then he encountered me and has informed me the Holy Spirit has specifically advised him not to talk with me anymore. Nevertheless, he can be sure I'll continue to question his views.

"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."(2 Tim 4:2-4).

An open response To Dodo and OIG given in christian love and friendship.

Dodo"It's good to be open and talk our differences and how Christians have arrived at such opposed understandings." Indeed it is but it is a two way street and Len has a right to show his love of Christians and declare any differences he sees and then give his insight into why he believes such, just as you and OIG declare yours freely.

May I state that the clue to most who frequent this blog is the Owners moniker! He declares his belief both religois and political and states it forthrightly. Ernst is shocked that you are shocked that this is the case and a similar position would be Ernst going to the blog of The holy see and expecting him to declare the virtues of protestantism, then Ernst be shocked he wasn't!

"I just see him caught in the mesh of fundamental evangelicalism." Most here are that way inclined, Ernsty included. Should you really be shocked, we are reformed and then reformed further still?

OIG "The aforementioned Len, Tingey and Atlas Wept, to mention but a mere dreary three..." Ernst would NOT include Len an enemy or anyone who loves Jesus as Ernst values his opinions as he is evangelical like Ernst, even if Len states things in a different way than Ernst would (We both love the sinner and hate the sin like Jesus did and does). He cares for your souls and sees you as fellow sinners lost in a church that says it is supreme, where we, who are not RC, disagree and give our reasons for this. Fair comment, would you not say?

Atlas merely frustrates Ernst with her 'here it is, there it is' for nearly everything but no FACTS to back it up, thereby any useful conversation, sadly, is near impossible. G Tingey is merely an angry old atheist who is trapped in a 'Sola 3d world' of his own choosing and the folly associated with such a position.

Dodo "Nevertheless, he can be sure I'll continue to question his views." So you should and so should he and answer you accordingly, with no offence taken on both sides as you cannot force a person to accept the truth except the Almighty reveals it and softens your heart for him. Who is on the Lord's side is His question to all men and Ernst does his bit to show him.

All Ernst is saying is that this is a Reformed blog and not Roman Catholic and that it would be less without both yours and Albert's contributions but be not offended at the comments of others who are not RC adherents as would be expected if Ernst and others went to such blogs as What Does the Prayer Really Say?, Ask Sister Mary Martha or Damian Thompson! What would we expect to hear regarding protestantism - that we are separated and therefore eternally lost without embracing Rome, that we have not the true sacraments etc, etc? Balance chaps, balance!

Remember, His Grace bears us with grace and kindness on his blog, despite our diverse opinions. He merely ask for it to be stated in Love and the Spirit of Our Wonderful Saviour.

Well then, Chaps?

Ersnty S Blofeld..Tiddles agrees with what Ernst has said..Yes, she's nodding and rubbing herself against Ernst's leg in approval. She might not be Caedmon's cat but she'll do for Ernst. Shalom to all.

"Happy New Year (alas, the Jewish kind) everyone. May it bring you all health, wealth and happiness." Happy New year, my boy. Trust it still is in the year AD where you are? unlike here, if the BBC has it's way.

"If history is no longer on the curriculum, don't they at least teach plain old logic to the young wastrels anymore, Mr Ernst?"

A Bleed'n state 'comprehensive education', my lad, is what Ernst attributes it to, that has brought this extreme form of numptyism upon us.

Only if logic is something that is dvd based and could be played on a Playstation 3 or XBOX would it interest this wastrel youth, my fine chap.History is only interesting if it starts from when THEY were born and nothing earlier.

Thank you for your good wishes! Salutations to your family and, as importantly to a kitty-cat owner such as myself (Miss Nuisance and Miss Ketzl), all the best to Miss Tiddles and her continuing access to victuals...even under the currently dire conditions in your suffering Albion.

To answer your Jewish calendar question, it's the year of 5772, the fourth day of the month of Tishrei. Today is our one day-Fast of Gedaliah, beginning at dawn and ending after sundown, and altyhough I managed to wake up early to feed and water my myself, I rationalized that all's well and promptly slipped into REM again. this means that as my blood sugar levels drops, my responses to nitwittery from the likes of Corrigan1 will either result in a passive, "yeah, sure, whatever, you win" or a full thermonuclear barrage. To paraphrase Clint Eastwood in one of his films, my line to the nitwits is, "ask yourself punk, 'do I feel lucky?'"

PS, I simply must know what is a "numpty." I can approximate its meaning, and it's one of those words which sound like what they are describing.

OoIG and the Dodo,Sorry(not) for stepping on your religious sensibilities)

I see the truth of the Gospel is beginning to irritate you.Well that is exactly what it is meant to do!If anything is going to shake you out of your religious complacency it is the 'offence' of the Gospel.The Pharisees were so offended by the Gospel that they stooped to conspiracy and murder to stop its advance.

You cannot offend me try as you might the more insults I gather the more determined I am that the Truth of the Gospel(unadulterated version) goes out.

I do realise that Catholics are 'locked in'to whatever the pope decides is 'scripturally correct' for them to follow.And if they disregard whatever the pope claims is the Word of God(even if it contradicts God Himself) then they (Catholics )are doomed.So anyone who follows the Word of God alone comes under a Catholic curse(by cutting out the middle man the pope himself)so if anyone is scared ****less it is any Catholic who dares to think of breaking free from the shackles of Catholicism.Catholicism is a clever deception they've got a clever system. How to preserve error. How to perpetuate error. Make heresy infallible. And the arch heretic unassailable, ir-reformable and absolutely authoritative.

Between you two, you have brought the Inspector General down a few pegs, and so you should ! A bit of humility is good for the soul, and he suggests a lack of humility goes a long way to explaining the wrongs of the world. We also don’t want the Inspector General getting above himself, that would never do. Arrogance is not an attractive trait. You two are indeed wise council, and IG is quite honoured you have taken the time out to ‘rough him up’ a little.

We are of course, all brothers in Christ – even G. Tingey if he wants. (The Inspector can’t help but thinking that if the Holy Spirit but visited him in the night and gave him a bowel moving experience, he’d have the ‘tangible’ evidence he so craves...)

May God bless all of us who have found the archbishop's site, and let us hear ALL opinions, as no doubt is what the archbishop wishes...

The Inspector General remains yours and the Empire’s most humble and attentive servant, sirs.

You are a good soul, Sir. Your approach is balanced and well written, if a bit 'pee-taking' at times. Hopefully, we will have opportunities in the future to gently test our different beliefs.

Reformed and reformed again? There is 'reform' and their 'revolution'. There is also evidence and fabrication and misrepresentation.

My understanding is that our host leans towards the Higher specrum of the via media that is the Anglican Communion including Apostolic succession, priesthood and sacramentals.

I'm in no way denying anyone the right to express their views. Indeed, it is good to be able to better understand their objections to the Church of Rome.

Do I get shocked? At times. Initially I found it hard encountering the venom behind some of the opinion expressed towards the Vatican and, I confess, over reacted. The ecumenical circles I move in tend to be more circumspect and polite and build on what we share.

a) Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others (One of Ernst's joys in life when he stumbles across the poor folk..Mr Lindsay in mind! They give joy to others when they least want to. LOL).

b) A good humoured admonition, a term of endearment

c) A reckless, absent minded or unwise person

Ie "That numpty's driving with no lights on!"

or in a nutshell..

" A person sooooo stupid they are incapable of understanding the simpliest of thing."

Len. If it hadn’t been for the organised church over 2000 years, you wouldn’t be able to have your hallowed form of Christianity, because you wouldn’t have heard of Christianity. Hence, Jesus wanted to spread the word, not keep it for inward looking dreamers like you. There MUST be man's orginasation if the Word is to continue...

Dodo. The Inspector fears you are. But ‘Fight the good Fight’ old chap. Here’s hoping he answers my last direct point, without bringing both Testaments into it – not much to ask for and he’s not going to be let off the hook. He’s taking his time though, probably copying and pasting as you suggest...

What I find so annoying is that his understanding of Christ's message 'on the ground', so to speak, is insightful. He also has a good understanding of modern ills. However, he is a 'prophet of doom' and is a bit too enthusiatic about society falling apart. The 'end times' you see.

I'll watch with interest and try to stand back. May God give you the words you neeed, when you need them.

I'll make a 'confession' - not of the sacramental order you understand.

I do not know what 'protestants' actually stand for. It is such a generic term and it seems to me there is as much division, if not more, between the different groups within it as there is between 'it' and Roman Catholicism. The one unifying element seems to be hostility towards Rome.

Am I being too harsh? Yes, I know you posted the doctrinal principles for me in an earlier post. But take one example - 'scripture alone'. How can one judge between the myriad (very nearly said legion) protestant interpretations of scripture? 'Fundamental evangelicals', whatever this really means, also seem obsessed with 'end times' that they see to be just around the corner. And yet, again, there are so many different predictions.

The Inspector General is still waiting for you to address his point made 2 October 2011 20:29. Now listen here, and stand to attention when the Inspector is talking to you man.

You are not, repeat not, to use any quotation from the bible, neither chapter or verse. Is that fully understood. Neither are you to rely on anything your groomers have given you.You MUST answer the point made using your God given mind, even if you are using it for the first time since being born again. Do you fully understand what is required of you. Good, then you are dismissed for now....

"I do not know what 'protestants' actually stand for." Let old Ernsty enlighten you, my boy but in truth I believe you are being a tad sophistic? Protestant - Latin protestari- To publicly protest/declare and although the term Protestant was not initially applied to the reformers, after some years it was used to describe all groups protesting Roman Catholic orthodoxy.It can also refer to a general term being used merely to signify Christians who belong to neither the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, or Oriental Orthodoxy, like old Ernst.

"if not more, between the different groups within it as there is between 'it' and Roman Catholicism." A tad like Romanism..too many heads such as Luther, Zwingli and John Calvin and not enough congregationalists, where the body is able to make up it's own mind. Ernst does not need a protestant pope either, Christ Himself is sufficient!

"The one unifying element seems to be hostility towards Rome. " The clue is in the name?? and is not hostility but severe disagreeal! and to which circumspection (another term for 'turning a blind eye') and polite behaviour (We are all in this together) alone does NOT build on anything worth sharing..Even Mormons and JW say similar as to what we all share.

However there is no need to turn on folks if they do not see eye to eye but the problem remains and cannot be ignored.

"But take one example - 'scripture alone'. How can one judge between the myriad (very nearly said legion) protestant interpretations of scripture?" Pure sophistry and you know it! you naughty bird.

Sola scriptura maintains that the Bible (rather than church tradition or ecclesiastical interpretations of the Bible is and MUST be the final source of authority for all Christians. We are called to know and correctly divide The Word of God!

"How can one judge between the myriad (very nearly said legion) protestant interpretations of scripture? " Ernst is not Protestant but reformed further and ignores parts that others brought through whilst Protesting. I have a brain and can receive assistance from the Holy Spirit Himself if Ernst goes to Him so why do I need 'direction' from others who are as lost as Ernst. I can go to the source as surely as they can. It is my responsibility to know Why and What I believe! I listen, check if what is said is correct from Scripture, then alter or stick with what I have understood. That some do not believe in a rapture of believers and others do (Ernst does) is not damaging but will lead to a surprise when it occurs but believing that Christ has not atoned sufficiently to save to the uttermost is a gulf that cannot be bridged by being polite and discreet, my old bird!

"'Fundamental evangelicals', whatever this really means, also seem obsessed with 'end times' that they see to be just around the corner. " Some protestant are ammilenialist others of us are not depending on how you interpret Scripture. The more you allegorise, like RC, Lutherans etc the more you are amillienialist, whilst the more you take the Bible literally, the more you are dispensational. Simples! Guess which view Ernst is?

"One Holy Spirit inspiring so many differences? How can this be?"Because people ignore His leadings and want the glory of scripture but without the study. He does not deposit scripture inside your head, willy nilly, you must play your part. It is required behaviour FOR YOU/US to know Your/Our God!

Many thanks for taking the time with this straight forward description. Much appreciated. A lot to think over.

Please do not assume that Catholics do not search scripture and seek guidance from the Holy Spirit. Roman Catholics do submit to the final authority of the Church in matters of dogma and doctrine but we are not unquestioning robots, I assure you.

Not sure I completely understand what I take is a criticism of Roman Catholicism:

" ... but believing that Christ has not atoned sufficiently to save to the uttermost is a gulf that cannot be bridged by being polite and discreet."

Who would disagree? There could be no salvation without Christ. The issue is how we graft ourselves to Him and sustain ourselves in the Christian journey through membership of His mystical body - the Church.

I repeat, thank you for the time and thought in sharing some of the most significant differences. And you avoided calling Catholic names too!

Not sure I completely understand what I take is a criticism of Roman Catholicism:

" ... but believing that Christ has not atoned sufficiently to save to the uttermost is a gulf that cannot be bridged by being polite and discreet."

Who would disagree? (Your church via the council of Trent ! )There could be no salvation without Christ. (But which salvation do you refer to?) The issue is how we graft ourselves to Him and sustain ourselves in the Christian journey through membership of His mystical body - the Church.(To which Ernst must severely disagree)

Consider this, that most Roman Catholics frankly admit that they hope to be saved by living a good life, as you have just implied in your comment above. They seek to obey the commandments, participate in the sacraments, go to church, do penance and give alms, recite prayers and so on, in order to merit salvation. In its official writings, the Catholic Church teaches that faith is important; but it also insists on the necessity of good works to merit eternal life. Please read carefully the quotations from the Council of Trent on Justification:

Canon 11,12,24,30,32..to quote all here would be as, the frenchies state,'de trop'

Official Catholic teaching therefore would not allow the sinner to rely by faith on the mercy of God or to believe that his sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake only. Something more is required. You must keep yourself justified by your own good works. You must merit grace and eternal life by your works. You must pay the debt of sins by your penance and your purgatorial sufferings. That is Rome's salvation by works on which Len and Ernst would disagree with you and OoIG.!

You say whoa, But you forgot to mention canon 1, which clearly asserts that we are not justified by our works. "If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema."

This canon gives an initial impression that Rome denies justification by works just as the Bible (and evangelicals) also do. In fact it does not! The canon simply says that a man cannot be justified by performing the works of the Law by his own natural powers. However, the same canon indicates that a man can 'receive divine grace through Jesus Christ' to perform the works necessary for justification. In other words, Rome teaches that God helps man to do good works and hence to fully satisfy the Law. Only then is a person qualified to enter heaven.

So then, what is required for a person to be justified at the end, that is, to be accounted to have fully satisfied divine law, and therefore to merit eternal life? Trent answers: THEIR GOOD WORKS! Their good works fully satisfy the divine law. Their works merit eternal life.

Roman Catholic theology insists that the Christian's good works are truly his good merits, and by these works, he preserves and increases the initial righteousness received in baptism to finally attain eternal life (canons 24 and 32). Without doubt, the official documents of the Roman Catholic Church teach justification by works.

In contrast to this, the Bible declares:

“Romans 2:4-6Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, (reckons, credits to one’s account) righteousness apart from works” .

The Bible asserts that he who "does not work" but "believes" is justified before God. Justification is not the reward for our works. Justification is the free gift of grace which we do not merit. The works that a Christian performs - and every true believer performs good works - are not the basis of their acceptance before God. The blood and righteousness of Jesus is the only basis for the believer's justification. "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him... by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous" (Romans 5:9, 19).

That is the true Gospel; therefore to Ernst, Rome’s message is counterfeit and grossly misleading.

The quest for the simple truth of the Gospel is NOT rocket science as some might suggest.The Gospel of Jesus Christ is so simple that even a fool could understand it.However you need help to misunderstand the Word of God, and there is plenty of help available!.The True Gospel is there but it has been buried under piles of rubbish deposited on it by unscrupulous and misguided men.

How to define truth is simple;

1, Make a list of all the religious precepts' you have been taught.2, acquire a Bible and search the scriptures to see if your religion features there.(Very helpful if you simply read the text and put no 'spin' on any of the scriptures.)3, Do not ask any 'religious experts' or anyone who claims to be 'infallible'(except the only infallible person the Holy Spirit Himself) for any help.That way you will find(shock ,horror,that what you have been following is in the main part a 'religion' devised by man. Now( this part takes courage)take all the rubbish that you have discovered posing as the Word of God and place it in the rubbish bin where it belongs.

Ernst,your explanations will be very helpful for anyone wishing an understanding of Christianity.

If Catholics would enlist the help of the Holy Spirit error would be eliminated. He guides us into all truth. John 16:13—"But when He, the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth for He will not speak on His own initiative but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." The role of the Holy Spirit is to show us that we are sinners and to point us to, and guide us to, a clear understanding of who Jesus Christ is, leading us to a commitment to Him. He also helps us to understand God’s Word and its application in our lives. He is the "Spirit of Truth" and will only reveal truth to us.

"your explanations will be very helpful for anyone wishing an understanding of Christianity." Ernst does his bit because he wants ALL who will hear to be with him surrounded by so great a crowd of believers within the midst of Him who loved us to His death..because He loved us whilst we were still His enemies and called us 'friend'.

"He also helps us to understand God’s Word and its application in our lives. He is the "Spirit of Truth" and will only reveal truth to us." Indeed, old boy. There is no problem in having questions. It is not a sign of unbelief but a desire to know Him better and fuller and His desires for us. He quite literally demands we come and reason with Him.

All He asks is that we listen and rejoice afterwards in what a Wonderful, Mighty Counsellor we have in Him.

No Catholic theologian would recognise the simplistic and distorted picture of Roman Catholicism you have presented above!

I'm no theologian and I'm not as well read in these matters as you appear to be but you're evidently relying on protestant sources for your analysis not Catholic ones.

First and foremost the Church teaches that faith in Christ and acceptance of His sacrifice for us is the fundamental prerequisite for eternal life. No qualification.

It does not teach a 'good life' is sufficient or that 'good works' will secure salvation. Nor does it teach that mere compliance with Church ritual will win one a place in Heaven.

Was St James wrong?"How does it help, my brothers, when someone who has never done a single good act claims to have faith? Will that faith bring salvation? ...faith if good deeds do not go with it, is quite dead."

Was Christ wrong? His division of the damned and saved is entirely based on the acts of kindness and mercy done by people to their disadvantaged fellow men; Jesus identifies such kindness with kindness towards Himself.

"Then the King will say to those on his right hand, "Come, you whom my Father has blessed, take as your heritage the kingdom prepared for you since the foundation of the world.For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you made me welcome, lacking clothes and you clothed me, sick and you visited me, in prison and you came to see me."Then the upright will say to him in reply, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and make you welcome, lacking clothes and clothe you? When did we find you sick or in prison and go to see you?"And the King will answer, "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me."

Was Jesus wrong when He summed up the Gospel message:

"This is the first (commandment): ... you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength.The second is this: You must love your neighbour as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.'

Trent rejected a number of protestant doctrines considered to be heretical. According to Martin Luther, justification by faith alone is the article on which the church stands or falls yet, as you know, he added the word 'alone' to the bible!

Catholicism sees justification to be offered upon the basis of faith and good works as opposed to the protestant doctrine of faith alone, and faith is treated as a progressive work. The idea of man being utterly passive under the influence of grace was rejected. For Catholics justification and sanctification are a process, and loss of their permanence can come from grevious sin.

There is ample scriptural support for the Catholic teaching and doctrines.

"... What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? ... Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"James 2:

"We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him,' but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did."(1 John 2:3-7)

"Behold, I am coming soon. I bring with me the recompense I will give to each according to his deeds."(Revelation 22:12)

"but you're evidently relying on protestant sources for your analysis not Catholic ones." Are canonical law from the Roman Catholic church now protestant sources..*uncontrollable giggles*"First and foremost the Church teaches that faith in Christ and acceptance of His sacrifice for us is the fundamental prerequisite for eternal life. No qualification." I answered this in my comments above but it was obviously not 'acceptable' to you, the implications of Canon 1 and other canons at The Council of Trent on RCC definitive declarations of tenets it adheres to?

As stated previously you confuse Christ's regeneration of believers with Christ's recompense of believers.

Good works, or simply works, within any Christian theology are a person's (exterior) actions or deeds, contrasting with interior qualities such as grace or faith.

The New Testament exhibits a tension between two aspects of grace:

* the idea that grace is from God and sufficient to cover any sin (except the Unforgivable sin), and * the idea that grace does not free Man from his responsibility to behave morally.

The Protestant principle of Sola fide states that no matter what a person's action, salvation comes through faith alone. St Paul wrote that 'For by grace ye are saved through faith: and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast'. Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV) For St Paul, salvation, like the wages of the labourers in the parable, is God's gift at God's sole prerogative. Were it achieved by works (erga; any human effort that intends earning; see Rom. 4:4), men could take pride in their efforts toward holiness, and God's gift of grace would be diminished in contrast to man's efforts.

Paul explains the contrast between works after salvation Ephesians 2:8-9 with - works without salvation as in Romans 2:6-9. He said in Romans 2:6,"God will give to every man according to his deeds". Paul did not infer salvation but confirmed Ephesian 6:8 "Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he received of the Lord, whether he be bond or free".

Romans 2:7-9 "To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life. But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God."

Paul's use of the words - 'patient, continuance and seek for' to described the state of the mind and an expectation of that individual to receive a good reward from God but not salvation, as salvation only comes through faith in Jesus Christ, as stated in the Acts 4:12 KJV "Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved".

A more works-oriented perspective is indeed presented as you state by James 2:1-26, concluding that faith without works is dead. By "works," James here appears to include both acts of charity, and righteousness according to the laws of the spirit; [Love thy neighbour as Thyself] the preceding text mentions charity, which being commonly interpreted, means love.

Christians are no longer bound under the law of Moses. see Romans 8:2-4 KJV "For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death, for what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit".

An inward change, the forsaking of old sinful ways, and being reborn in a spirit of generosity is to James the true test of conversion. Without these things, claiming to have "faith" is a sham. Grace must be something that steers the Christian to avoid sin and practice charity/love.

The key meaning is that without these signs, it seems likely that grace was NEVER there. Something MUST have happened and it must be visible!

James speaks of works after salvation, and Paul speaks of the lack of works in gaining salvation which is a correlation or agreement.

DodoFirst and foremost the Church teaches that faith in Christ and acceptance of His sacrifice for us is the fundamental prerequisite for eternal life. No qualification.

The Inspector is somewhat relieved his is not going to be ‘denied at the gate’ so to speak. In the Inspector's opinion, we are down here ‘to get on with it’ ie building a worthwhile civilisation and perhaps colonising space. The majority of Christians on this planet probably don’t know where next month’s meals are coming from. No time at all for serious contemplation on why us wretches deserve salvation and the hoops the born again, and reformed again protestants, would make us jump through. (Ernst et al, God made the majority piss poor; accept your comparative wealth which includes a computer, with grace, there’s good chaps)...

"No time at all for serious contemplation on why us wretches deserve salvation and the hoops the born again, and reformed again protestants, would make us jump through.

Dear fellow, the hoops are all of your own/Rome's making and even then you do not know if you have jumped enough or gone through enough hoops!

(Ernst et al, God made the majority piss poor

(1.Man was created to know, love and serve God, to bless Him and thank Him daily for the abundance of His blessings. The majority do not! 2.As in Israel, although God had promised greatly to bless His people, it was not His design that poverty should be wholly unknown among them. 3.He declared that the poor should never cease out of the land. There would ever be those among His people who would call into exercise their sympathy, tenderness, and benevolence. Then, as now, persons were subject to misfortune, sickness, and loss of property; yet so long as they followed the instruction given by God, there were no beggars among them, neither any who suffered for food. 4.The law of God gave the poor a right to a certain portion of the produce of the soil. When hungry, a man was at liberty to go to his neighbor's field or orchard or vineyard, and eat of the grain or fruit to satisfy his hunger. 5.It was in accordance with this permission that the disciples of Jesus plucked and ate of the standing grain as they passed through a field upon the Sabbath day.6.There are many who urge with great enthusiasm that all men should have an equal share in the temporal blessings of God. But this was not the purpose of the Creator. A diversity of condition is one of the means by which God designs to prove and develop character, yours included. 7.Yet He intends that those who have worldly possessions shall regard themselves merely as stewards of His goods, as entrusted with means to be employed for the benefit of the suffering and the needy.) ; accept your comparative wealth which includes a computer, with grace,(For which Ernst does daily!)

Consider this, That if the law given by God for the benefit of the poor had continued to be carried out, how different would be the present condition of the world, morally, spiritually, and temporally! Selfishness and self-importance would not be manifested as now, but each would cherish a kind regard for the happiness and welfare of others; and such widespread destitution as is now seen in many lands would not exist.

Trust this meets with your spiritual and temporal concerns for Ernst et al, old boy.

Now dear chap you know that I meant you were relying on protestant critiques of Trent rather than the actual documents from the Council. They have to be read as a whole and in conjunction with the catechism that followed.

For every passage of scripture you cite to support your 'born again' and by faith and scripture alone position, I could respond with passages that contradict.

The bible is capable of misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Church history has shown us this. Just consider the heresies the early Church had to contend with.

I have this notion of many thousands of protestants pouring over the words of scripture desperate to justify their principles and doctrines - and seeking textual evidence to support their differences with another and with Rome. When I read scripture I, well, just read scripture! I most certainly do not believe I understand it more than others. Often it speaks to me about my personal circumstances but I leave the bigger issues to those better qualified.

Bottom line: Christ appointed a leader for His Church who would be charged with the fearsome responsibility of guiding people in all truth. He also assured the Church He established the Holy Spirit would protect it.

The Church went astray 500 years ago and Martin Luther broke ranks for personal as well as theological reasons. Christ never promised it wouldn't or that all Popes would be saints! The Church reformed itself internally.

It is as simple and as complicated as that friend. Get back on the programme.

"Consider this, That if the law given by God for the benefit of the poor had continued to be carried out, how different would be the present condition of the world, morally, spiritually, and temporally! Selfishness and self-importance would not be manifested as now, but each would cherish a kind regard for the happiness and welfare of others; and such widespread destitution as is now seen in many lands would not exist.

Indeed, indeed. Now you're sounding like a Papel envoy!

Along came the infamous 'protestant ethic' which equated wealth with spiritual uprightness and unleashed selfishness and greed!

Contrast the social teaching of Roman Catholicism with that of classical protestantism.

"I meant you were relying on protestant critiques of Trent rather than the actual documents from the Council" Ernst always reads the words and then arrives at his own conclusion..Rome declares a bit of Christ plus extras, bit like its a co-operative..Your church in Rome states this so be proud of it if they are the final authority based on church tradition or ecclesiastical interpretations. However it does tend to repulse others no so persuaded? "The bible is capable of misunderstanding and misrepresentation. " Taken out of context and given a twist, is how Ernst would phrase it. You decide how you would like to behave first or points that relate to how you will operate, then scour looking for the odd verse..Voila..Health and Wealth adherents do this also..all cases of such are wrong and unscriptural, irrespective of who you are! Not the fault of The Word of God that says what it means and means what it says if viewed in totality.

"Just consider the heresies the early Church had to contend with. " Incorrect, old bird. Consider the heresies the Apostles had to contend with within the early church you so revere and why Epistles were needed to be sent, to correct them!

"When I read scripture I, well, just read scripture!" The difference between reading and studying is east to west, old chap! You may read a newspaper to find out Man Utd's results or How the popes visit was received in Germany but you study The Word of God to know Him better! Where you err, perhaps?

"Bottom line: Christ appointed a leader for His Church who would be charged with the fearsome responsibility of guiding people in all truth." Unfounded Roman Dogma, dear fellow, Dogma!

"The Church reformed itself internally." It unequivocally re-stated it's tenets and set out to curb excesses such as sale of indulgences, nothing else! It was not only your ex faithful monk Luther who was horiffied but faithful rome servants such as Erasmus and Thomas Colet etc, etc..hence the counter reformation!

"Indeed, indeed. Now you're sounding like a Papel envoy!" *Horrified Gulp* How on earth does Rome enact the Law of God as revealed in the Old Testament as laid out before Israel, to administer, show me? Nobody does! Such an Outrageous comment!

"Along came the infamous 'protestant ethic' which equated wealth with spiritual uprightness and unleashed selfishness and greed! " Must Ernst really show you Rome's avarice/vast material gain and doing it's own pleasure at the expense of consideration for others also, 'Banco Ambrosiano and Roberto Calvi, AKA "God's Banker" by the press because of his close association with the Holy See.' anyone?. A bit of humility and contrition is required on all sides, my bird?Neither can stand 'Upright' as you state, before the Almighty.

"Contrast the social teaching of Roman Catholicism with that of classical protestantism." How about looking at what God states regarding how society should function towards the poor instead, It's all in the Old and New Testament as Ernst has pointed out, if people would study rather than read it only. No degree is required!

Off to beddie byes, as old Ernst has had a busy day doing DIY and glimpses of the Conservative conference has bored him stupid..more double speak tomorrow by the look of the speakers.

Why add anything to Christ`s perfect work at Calvary?.The answer quite simply(but never admitted openly) is pride. ................Now I DO realise that God HAS ordained a righteousness that CAN be obtained by works of the Law;"Suppose there is a righteous man who does what is just and right. He does not eat at the mountain shrines or look to the idols of the house of Israel. He does not defile his neighbor's wife or lie with a woman during her period. He does not oppress anyone, but returns what he took in pledge for a loan. He does not commit robbery but gives his food to the hungry and provides clothing for the naked. He does not lend at usury or take excessive interest. He withholds his hand from doing wrong and judges fairly between man and man. He follows my decrees and faithfully keeps my laws. That man is righteous; he will surely live, declares the Sovereign LORD" (Ezekial 18:5-9, NIV.)

So, God has provided a way of salvation that is not by faith, but by works. However, this plan has a caveat: to attain such a righteousness, one must obey all of the law. "The LORD commanded us to obey all these decrees and to fear the LORD our God, so that we might always prosper and be kept alive, as is the case today. And if we are careful to obey all this law before the LORD our God, as he has commanded us, that will be our righteousness" (Deuteronomy 6:24-25, NIV.) Similar statements are found in the Old Testament in Numbers 15:40; Deuteronomy 11:32, 12:28; Joshua 1:7, 23:6, and in many other references. The breaking of a single tenet of the entire law is the equivalent of breaking the entire law.(Continued)

(continued) Much of Paul’s writings concerning the relationship between faith and works were written to Christians who were under a significant amount of Jewish influence, many by their own Jewish heritage, and others by the Jewish Christian influence within the church. "Paul’s contention with the Judaizers in Galatia was over the means and grounds of justification. It is utterly impossible for one to be justified by the works of the law" (Gal. 2:16; 3:11.)8 Paul responds very harshly to those who seek to place a burden of law-based works on the Christian community. "We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified" (Galatians 2:15-16, KJV.) To the Jews and the Judaizers he saw this philosophy as a fatal snare that kept them from salvation "because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the ‘stumbling stone’"(Romans 9:32.)

As usual you are spectacularly missing the point! Endless scatter-gun quotes from scripture are not advancing clarity.

Christ established a new commandment - to love another. Who is saying anywhere that as Christians we should follow the law of Moses?!

By the way, where is it written in the New Testament that one should only refer to canonical texts? As you know, they were not deemed to be canon until the Christian Councils under Church leaders, determined them to be.

Dodo, The reasons I gave (The Law of Moses given to the Jews were an example)a point which you either missed or ignored.)Catholicism is a 'works based'religion for you to pretend otherwise is unfitting to your religion and intellectually dishonest.

For you to continue trotting out the same lie about Catholicism is disgraceful. Do read what has been written about this.

And your answer to my question about scripture alone?

"... where is it written in the New Testament that one should only refer to canonical texts? As you know, they were not deemed to be canon until the Christian Councils under Church leaders, determined them to be."

Toda rabah/thank you very much, Ariadne; may your year be sweet. I've been scattered these last two weeks as the Holy Days wreak their predictable havoc on the regimentations of the working world, and just saw your message.

About His Grace:

Archbishop Cranmer takes as his inspiration the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby: ‘It’s interesting,’ he observes, ‘that nowadays politicians want to talk about moral issues, and bishops want to talk politics.’ It is the fusion of the two in public life, and the necessity for a wider understanding of their complex symbiosis, which leads His Grace to write on these very sensitive issues.

Cranmer's Law:

"It hath been found by experience that no matter how decent, intelligent or thoughtful the reasoning of a conservative may be, as an argument with a liberal is advanced, the probability of being accused of ‘bigotry’, ‘hatred’ or ‘intolerance’ approaches 1 (100%).”

Follow His Grace on

The cost of His Grace's conviction:

His Grace's bottom line:

Freedom of speech must be tolerated, and everyone living in the United Kingdom must accept that they may be insulted about their own beliefs, or indeed be offended, and that is something which they must simply endure, not least because some suffer fates far worse. Comments on articles are therefore unmoderated, but do not necessarily reflect the views of Cranmer. Comments that are off-topic, gratuitously offensive, libelous, or otherwise irritating, may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on any thread does not constitute their endorsement by Cranmer; it may simply be that he considers them to be intelligent and erudite contributions to religio-political discourse...or not.

The Anglican Communion has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning.Dr Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1945-1961

British Conservatism's greatest:

The epithet of 'great' can be applied only to those who were defining leaders who successfully articulated and embodied the Conservatism of their age. They combined in their personal styles, priorities and policies, as Edmund Burke would say, 'a disposition to preserve' with an 'ability to improve'.

I am in politics because of the conflict between good and evil, and I believe that in the end good will triumph.Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher LG, OM, PC, FRS.(Prime Minister 1979-1990)

We have not overthrown the divine right of kings to fall down for the divine right of experts.Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton, OM, PC.(Prime Minister 1957-1963)

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.Sir Winston Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can).(Prime Minister 1940-1945, 1951-1955)

I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.Stanley Baldwin, 1st Earl Baldwin of Bewdley, KG, PC.(Prime Minister 1923-1924, 1924-1929, 1935-1937)

If you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent; if you believe the military, nothing is safe.Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, KG, GCVO, PC.(Prime Minister 1885-1886, 1886-1892, 1895-1902)

I am a Conservative to preserve all that is good in our constitution, a Radical to remove all that is bad. I seek to preserve property and to respect order, and I equally decry the appeal to the passions of the many or the prejudices of the few.Benjamin Disraeli KG, PC, FRS, Earl of Beaconsfield.(Prime Minister 1868, 1874-1880)

Public opinion is a compound of folly, weakness, prejudice, wrong feeling, right feeling, obstinacy, and newspaper paragraphs.Sir Robert Peel, Bt.(Prime Minister 1834-1835, 1841-1846)

I consider the right of election as a public trust, granted not for the benefit of the individual, but for the public good.Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool.(Prime Minister 1812-1827)

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.The Rt Hon. William Pitt, the Younger.(Prime Minister 1783-1801, 1804-1806)